School district: Arbitrator’s decision will lead to teacher layoffs

Within weeks, an undetermined number of Clark County School District teachers will receive the dreaded pink slip that bars them from returning to their classrooms next fall.

An arbitrator's decision released Wednesday requires the district to give raises to teachers for both seniority and continuing education credits for 2011-13, which Superintendent Dwight Jones said will force the district to initiate layoffs. The district had sought to freeze all employee salaries to remedy a severe budget shortfall.

Jones was reluctant to say how many positions will be cut or how much class sizes will increase. That will be determined in part by how many teachers retire or resign at the end of the school year. Typically, resignations and retirements create 600-800 teacher vacancies.

In the past, Jones has warned of about 1,000 teacher layoffs should the concession on raises be denied.

"While some teachers will receive raises, other teachers will receive pink slips, and that's not what's best for our students," said Jones, who said the notices will go out between May 16 and 31. "That's not what's best for our students."

The decision on keeping or setting aside raises was left to an arbitrator because the Clark County Education Association, which represents district teachers, and the district couldn't reach agreement on the 2011-12 and 2012-2013 contract terms.

Union officials refused to have teachers take a pay freeze - as the district's 19,000 other employees have done - and argued it wasn't necessary because the district has the money in its reserve fund.

The Review-Journal was denied access to union President Ruben Murillo's news conference on the arbitration decision.

"Their action in booting our reporter and photographer is regrettable and suggests that they're not interested in an objective report, only in coverage that favors their point of view," Review-Journal Editor Michael Hengel said. "Nothing will deter the Review-Journal's fair and objective coverage."

Jones has asserted since the summer that a pay freeze must be endured by all employees to prevent layoffs.

Murillo contended that Jones was bluffing and said the union had identified $70 million in the district's budget to cover raises.

The $70 million in question is no secret: It's clearly identified in public budget documents available to all, Jones said. But the district's reserve account is dangerously low. Because of the recession, it has hovered at 1 percent of the district's total operating budget while district policy requires the balance to be a minimum 2 percent.

The intent of the policy is the same as the state law that requires cities to have a minimum 1 percent reserve fund balance. The money is a safety net for emergencies and shouldn't be used for normal, recurring expenses, such as salaries.

"They're just using smoke and mirrors," said Jones, who emphasized that he has been paying raises to teachers all year without layoffs because the district's 19,000 other employees agreed to the pay freeze.

But scraping by without instituting layoffs hurt the district in arbitration, Jones said.

"The arbitrator basically said 'You've paid all year. You can pay for two more months,' " Jones said. "It's amazing how doing a good deed can be punished."

Jones now must find $63 million for teacher raises again next year, which he said makes layoffs inevitable.

Though teachers who have been repeatedly suspended and rated poorly will be cut first - according to the district's contract with the teachers union - newly hired teachers will bear the brunt of layoffs. That is because the district will quickly run through the short list of teachers who meet the union's precise requirements for poor performers, which are those who have been suspended at least five days on two different occasions in the past two years and teachers who had been rated unsatisfactory twice within the past two school years.

The district hired 266 new teachers at the start of 2011-12 school year.

Certain teacher groups are safe because the district is short on math, science and special education teachers, Jones said. The district's five turnaround schools - Mojave, Chaparral and Western high schools, and Hancock and Elizondo elementary schools - which replaced at least 50 percent of their teaching staff this school year to improve student performance will also be spared layoffs, he said. However, layoffs probably will be evenly distributed among the 352 other schools, based on student enrollment.

The district and teachers union must continue contract negotiations on other issues. But Jones predicts the union will try to force arbitration again. That is because state law requires teacher raises to continue until a new contract is reached.

"My guess is we're back in the same game because they got rewarded for playing it," Jones said of the union.

The parties have held one negotiation meeting for a 2012-13 contract, but the district has filed a bad-faith bargaining complaint with the state arguing that the union is delaying negotiations to keep teacher raises coming.

Union officials originally offered 14 dates for negotiation meetings but later said its team was available for only two days that were more than a month out at the time.

"I do not see how a comprehensive contract can be seriously negotiated by putting off negotiations for a month ... for a half day and then wait almost another month for another half day of negotiations," the district's lead negotiator wrote in a response to the union.

Contact reporter Trevon Milliard at tmilliard@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0279.